Visitor stability vs instanceof flexibility
I am working on a GUI application which generates a configuration file. I have a class hierarchy for the configuration model and I use an object tree of that hierarchy in several different contexts. Currently, I use the Visitor pattern to avoid polluting my model classes with context specific code.
Changing __class__ in a factory?
I’m parsing a set of XML files of different kinds (these kinds are known in advance).
Should I create interfaces for data transfer objects?
Is it a good idea or a bad idea to create an interface for data transfer objects? Presuming that the object is usually mutable.
Design guidelines for this scenario in C#?
I have to create a validation system(I don’t want to use Data Annotation or any other system) for my C# application using .Net Compact Framework, where I have an object which contains many other objects.
Possible with PHP MVC Framework? A better solution to client ‘override’ of core functionality?
Background / The Problem
Does this situation call for well specified associations, single table inheritance, or polymorphic association?
I’m building a web-app where users can keep track of who owes whom money.
Is a pair of two tightly coupled classes any better than a single, larger class?
I’m rewriting somebody else’s code at the minute, and I came across two classes which reference each other directly and call methods on each other. Like so (example in C#):
C# dynamics and Expando object [closed]
It’s difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center. Closed 11 years ago. Under which application development scenarios C# dynamics and […]
Novel polymorphism – any reasons for this code?
As part of my work on a legacy C# application I’ve come across a novel (to me) use of an interface & concrete implementations. I can’t think of any reason why you’d do the following, but I’m pretty thick, so maybe someone else can?
Preventing Liskov Substitution violation
I am reimplementing some component and noticed that the original version has a Liskov Substitution violation. It’s not all that critical, though I’d like to get rid of it in the new implementation . It is however not clear to me how to do this.